Economic impact of nature conservation
RSPB Experience
[email protected]
The Royal Society for the protection of Birds
RSPB
EEA Copenhaguen 5th October
Le Menu
• Nature vs Economy – The omnipresent myth
• RSPB work and findings
• Methodology
• Economic impact of Natura 2000
• Conclusions
The omnipresent myth
Nature conservation constrains economic
development
Nature conservation implies closing an area
and not allowing anyone nor any activity to
take place there.
The omnipresent myth
“Buy a sporting estate and outlaw deer, grouse,
sheep, cattle and commercial forestry and
you make keepers, beaters, shepherds,
farmers and foresters redundant. They use
the pubs and shops, their wives provide b&b,
their children fill the local schools, the guns
leave heavy tips and stay in hotels. One
warden and a couple of scientists are not
going to fill this economic or social vacuum.”
The Field, Oct 2000
Nature constraints the economy?
RSPB reserves employ stalkers, farmers,
foresters, reserves managers...etc
Habitat management and restoration requires lots
of work related to habitat maintenance, habitat
restoration...etc.
Wildlife tourism can bring substantial benefits
Growing number of studies illustrate significant
levels of employment supported by natural
environment
RSPB work - Nature Reserves
RSPB reserves support more than 1000 FTE
jobs in UK local economies
£19 million spending by RSPB and a million
visitors / year.
7.1 jobs / 1,000 ha of productive land
Many of these jobs in remote rural areas – most
in less productive land.
All reports available from: www.rspb.org.uk
RSPB Work – Spectacular species
The presence of sea eagles brings £1.5-1.7
million to the Isle of Mull (West Scotland)
every year
290,000 people visit Osprey watching sites per
year bringing £3.5 million to nearby areas.
Other relevant bits of info
In Scotland’s €6,610 million / year tourism
economy, 14% of visitors are specifically
interested in wildlife
Natura 2000 has had a significant positive
regional economic impact in four Austrian
regions
4 National Parks in Spain receive 6.5 million
visits / year
Methodology
Collection of visitors data
- spending, movements, motivations, etc
- number of visitors to site
- definition of ‘local economy’
Methodology
Use of economic multipliers
• £1 spent supports 23 – 33p of local income
• Expenditure £30-40,000 supports 1 FTE in
local economies in the UK // £37,000 = 1 job
Economic impact of N2000
What level of economic activity could be supported
by properly managed N2000?
Need to quantify:
- employment supported by N2000 sites (staff,
contractors, agriculture, forestry...)
- employment supported by visitors
Economic impact of N2000
Contribution of such study to EU Biodiversity
strategy:
- Aid / ease implementation of Natura 2000 by
dispelling the myth
- Improve communication with key sectors by
putting Natura 2000 into Lisbon agenda terms
- Contribute to secure adequate funding by
informing EU budget review 2008 (?)
Economic impact of N2000 – Next steps
Define/discuss methodology:
- develop multipliers for representative set of EU
habitats & states
- are there better ways to do this? (ie. annual
turnover of N2000 dependant business)
Conclusions
Nature conservation can make a positive
contribution to economic activity.
Nature conservation protects wildlife AND economic
assets:
•
•
•
•
positive impact on local economies
attracts visitors and their money
enables investment
supports jobs in remote rural areas
Conclusions
Managing land to preserve EU natural heritage is
compatible with other economic sectors and
supports long term employment for EU citizens
Gaining an idea of the level of economic benefits
of Natura 2000 would make a valuable
contribution to EU biodiversity conservation